BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

4 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 14Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai508Delhi448Ahmedabad149Karnataka99Bangalore66Chennai61Kolkata54Pune51Jaipur41Raipur34Indore31Hyderabad27Chandigarh21Ranchi14Visakhapatnam12Surat11Cuttack5Guwahati5Lucknow4Nagpur4Cochin3Jabalpur2Rajkot2Agra1Panaji1Amritsar1Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 14A8Addition to Income4Section 2(22)(e)3Section 271(1)(c)3Section 36(1)(va)3Section 43B3Disallowance3Section 41(1)2Section 251(2)2

SHYAM SUNDER GUPTA,KANPUR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 168/LKW/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow06 May 2025AY 2012-13
Section 150Section 150(1)Section 153(3)(ii)Section 2(22)(e)Section 251(2)Section 41(1)

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(C) of\nthe Act are being initiated separately. (Addition: Rs.13,26,600/-)\nThe assessee's submission as under:\nThe AO has held that the balance of Rs.13,26,600/- being amount\nbrought forward from earlier years in the name M/s Scraptin Enterprises,\nKanpur has ceased to be payable as per the confirmation obtained

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BAREILLY vs. M/S L.H SUGAR FACTORY PVT. LTD.,, PILIBHIT

Penalty2

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 416/LKW/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow18 Jan 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 260A

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars is initiated separately.” The above findings of Assessing Officer clearly demonstrate that Assessing Officer has made the disallowance by mechanically following the formula given in Rule 8D. The assessee during the assessment proceedings had I.T.A. No.416/Lkw/2013 I.T.A. No.752/Lkw/2016 20 I.T.A. No.772/Lkw/2016 Assessment Year:2011-12 submitted vide letter dated 20/03/2015

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P POWER CORP. LTD., LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 298/LKW/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 Feb 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2009-10 Dy. Cit V. M/S U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. Range 6 Shakti Bhavan Lucknow 14, Ashok Marg Lucknow Tan/Pan:Aaacu5088M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri S. K. Madhuk, Cit (Dr) Respondent By: Shri Sandeep Kumar, Fca Date Of Hearing: 08 02 2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 22 02 2019

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Madhuk, CIT (DR)For Respondent: Shri Sandeep Kumar, FCA
Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)

271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, ignoring that the assessee had furnished inaccurate particulars of income by not offering for tax the disallowance under section 14A of the Act, although assessee had invested for shares of DISCOMS from the interest bearing borrowed funds. 2. The assessee filed return of income showing loss of Rs.15

M/S. AXIS MOTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,KANPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 289/LKW/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 44A

271(1)(c) of the Act as the issue was entirely covered in favour of the assessee as the assessee had deposited the amount before filing of return of income and therefore, as per the judgment of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Sagun Foundry (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT in IT Appeal